About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
federal government has done the right thing. when ints that somehow suspects have right to counsel miranda warnings causes them to stop cooperating with law enforcement is not facts and studies. and ct, d.o.j. officials senior law enforcement officials 90% of the ou 80% to time in sophisticated cases when defense counsel get involved to help emhis more and icit more information allow the case to go forward. there have been multiple cases 9/11 that have been prosecuted, investigated and prosecuted by law enforcement resulted in more information available to law lawful tools ing without needing to violate rights. senator mentioned graham. he pushed against the decision the combatant status. [video clip] >> i hope the congress will at this case and look at our laws and come to the to.lusion that i have come we are at war. for a going to be at war very long time and we have to have the tools to defend values.es within our one of those tools is the ability to question people about future attacks to gather intelligence for national purposes without benefit of counsel. the information will neve
with american citizens. it allows the justice department to delay reading a suspect his miranda rights if doing so is in the interest of -- quote -- "public safety." the administration had rightly invoked this public safety exception in the case of the boston suspect which provided our national security professionals a discreet period of time to gather intelligence from the suspect without the presence of his lawyer. however, soon after questioning him this way, the administration recently reversed itself and read the suspect his miranda rights. in doing so, the administration, in my view, gave up a valuable opportunity to lawfully and thoroughly question the suspect for purposes of gathering intelligence about potential future terrorist plots. whether we will be able to acquire such information has now been left entirely at the discretion of the suspect and his lawyer. put simply, the suspect has been told he has the right to remain silent, and if he doesn't want to provide intelligence, he doesn't have to. is this a responsible balance between a citizen's rights and our national security? the
bomber was mirandized within 45 minutes. i don't care if you read people miranda rights. i just don't want you to shut down the intelligence-gathering process. that individual was never designated an enassembly combatant. only way he agreed to cooperate is f.b.i. flew to his family i and his parents convinced him. times square bomber, the times square bombing incident, he had pakistan/taliban ties. read miranda rights, never designated enemy combatant. we never terroristed him for intelligence gathering purposes. osama bin laden's soim, abu gazey is in the federal system today and read miranda rights. never designated enemy combatant. can you imagine what osama bin laden's son-in-law could tell us about the terrorist organizations? he was the spokesman for al qaeda after 9/11. so there's a disturbing pattern here, quite frankly, of not gathering intelligence when that opportunity exists. thank you very much. i have to go. i will get a pen and pad and go next door to answer any questions if you have about the f.b.i. and, again, we're going to absorb a moment of silence here for the f
want the boston bombing suspect treated as an enemy combatants, sparking miranda debate. key republicans are calling on the obama administration to declare the 19-year-old suspect an enemy combatant subject to the loss of four, so intelligence officials can continue to interrogate him for as long as they deem necessary. authorities captured him in watertown, mass. friday evening. they are invoking the public .afety exception he remains hospitalized under sedation and remains unclear what kind of communication they are able to have him at the moment. judy is on the phone from north carolina, independent line. good morning, and welcome to the program. caller: thank you. my thought on the issue is that we are a large nation, an all- inclusive nation, and i believe that the boy scouts is a private organization and has the right to determine who their membership is. i believe there should be a third organization that some of the gay-rights people should put into place, and that would be the rainbow scouts. then they can put all the lbb tea in anything they wanted, -- lgbt. republi
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4